The ABC allows comments on some of our articles, as a space for you to contribute your thoughts about news events and participate in civil conversations about topical issues.

All comments are moderated and we make no guarantees that your contribution will be published.

Reply

Author

Email

Date/Time

10 Dec 2016 3:50:55am

Text

PreviousMessage

Oh dear.

"Ephesians 6:5... points to the responsibility of slaves not to act in ways that displease their masters and incur their master's wrath. And to serve with respect and sincerity of heart... just as their service for Christ should never be a pretense but to be ready to suffer as Christ suffered for us".

So what??? What does this tell us? It's completely ambivalent in its attitude towards the institution of chattel slavery. The article above the line was written to dispute the notion that slavery was a normal part of Christian life, but your interpretation of this verse clearly shows that it was. You're arguing my case for me.

"Perhaps you think that folks in the first century should have carried banners publicly to condemn the injustices of the Roman authorities..."

With slavery, we are presented with one of the greatest evils human beings have ever inflicted on each other, yet the leaders of the early church couldn't even say to a few gathered followers, "You know what, this slavery thing is an abomination", much less carry a banner through the streets. I often hear early Christians revered for their willingness to die for their beliefs, yet they weren't willing publicly to oppose this enormity. Clearly, they didn't believe slavery was such a bad thing.

"Or perhaps you think a band of escaped slaves should gather together ... only to be ruthlessly crushed by the Roman military in 71BC".

Again, you're making my argument for me. If Roman slavery was as benign as you suggest, why were these slaves willing to risk their lives to escape it? Many of them clearly thought violent death was preferable to a life of slavery, and yet you're telling me it was merely a variation on the worker/employer relationship. Are you sure you've given this enough thought?

"The Christian practice of treating slaves with respect, fairness and compassion was, in itself , an eloquent protest against any brutality and human exploitation..."

Eloquent??? In what way was it eloquent, when pious, righteous, god-fearing Christians continued to own slaves - and brutally exploit them - for the next 1800 years? And again, we're not talking about indentured kitchen hands here, we're talking full-on, whip-and-chains, work-to-death slavery. Two papal bulls were produced that positively encouraged and approved slavery. Read Dum Diversas or Romanus Pontifex and tell me whether the writer - the leading Christian of his day - was moved by the eloquence of the early Christian attitude to slavery. The Confederate States of America was one of the most overtly pious Christian societies in history - did they treat their slaves with "...respect, fairness and compassion"? Where do you suppose they found the justification for their brutality? Do you really suppose they found the example of the early Christians "eloquent&quot